Have just recieved a letter from Croydon Council regards planning permission for the demolition of St margarets Church & hall to be replaced with a 3 storey building (flats) & a nursery for 100 + kids.
I hope it just an application at the moment !
No doubt I will be paying a visit to the council to investigate this further as my garden backs onto the church watch this space.
Dazza
St Margaret Church Chevening Road
Started by
Dazza
, Feb 20 2004 11:05 AM
107 replies to this topic
#1
Dazza
-
- Members 3
-
- 4,280 posts
Council Boy
Posted 20 February 2004 - 11:05 AM
Your obviously mistaken me with someone who gives a fig
#2
miles
-
- Members 3
-
- 140 posts
Member
Posted 22 February 2004 - 05:35 PM
That's really interesting. We went to look at the house for sale next door to the church hall a couple of weeks ago, but decided it was too risky, as no-one seemed to know what was planned. Are they really knocking down the church as well as the hall? The hall is a dead loss, but I thought they would keep the exterior of the church, as it's an amazing building.
#3
Dazza
-
- Members 3
-
- 4,280 posts
Council Boy
Posted 25 February 2004 - 09:38 PM
Just had a neigbourhood meeting & met some of my neigbours for the 1st time.
Never knew how many professional people lived within a few doors of me.
However the plan is only at application stage at the present but the plan is to knock down the church , church hall & build flats on the corner (approx 6 flats) a nursery (for approx 100 kids) & a vicarage for the vicar of all saints church.
We have until the early part of March to log our objections to this application.
I cannot confirm the actual date to submit objections as on various literture posted to us there is a different end date.
Will update when I hear anymore news.
Dazza
Never knew how many professional people lived within a few doors of me.
However the plan is only at application stage at the present but the plan is to knock down the church , church hall & build flats on the corner (approx 6 flats) a nursery (for approx 100 kids) & a vicarage for the vicar of all saints church.
We have until the early part of March to log our objections to this application.
I cannot confirm the actual date to submit objections as on various literture posted to us there is a different end date.
Will update when I hear anymore news.
Dazza
Your obviously mistaken me with someone who gives a fig
#4
duckec01
-
- Members 3
-
- 253 posts
Member
Posted 27 February 2004 - 12:48 PM
This building is just outside the Harold conservation area. Therefore unless it is statutorily listed there is nothing to stop the actual demolition of the building. I would assume that it is not statutorily listed as the scheme would be a non-starter. I would advise you to lobby your local ward councillor and conservation officer to see whether they feel that the building is worthy of making an application to list the building. If you can get them on board and the building could be listed it would kill the scheme stone dead.
#5
Dazza
-
- Members 3
-
- 4,280 posts
Council Boy
Posted 27 February 2004 - 09:04 PM
I think most of residends know the church has been coming down for a while as it is sinking into the clay (Like most of the palace I hear) but this is the 1st application for new plans.
Quite a mixed reaction but most residents have concerns in some shape or form. It really depends on where you live on the street (chevening rd or orleans rd) of how you are affected .
Personally I have a big privacy issue as the church backs onto my garden & although the replacement structure is a lot smaller it overlooks my garden so no more naked bathing I guess !
Lets hope the same planners who masterminded & railroaded the 1 way system are not in charge.
Dazza
Quite a mixed reaction but most residents have concerns in some shape or form. It really depends on where you live on the street (chevening rd or orleans rd) of how you are affected .
Personally I have a big privacy issue as the church backs onto my garden & although the replacement structure is a lot smaller it overlooks my garden so no more naked bathing I guess !
Lets hope the same planners who masterminded & railroaded the 1 way system are not in charge.
Dazza
Your obviously mistaken me with someone who gives a fig
#6
Steve Palmer
-
- Members 2
-
- 145 posts
Member
Posted 28 February 2004 - 01:48 PM
Dazza,
Hard to give definitive advice to you without seeing both the plans and they relate to your property but some useful pointers.
Firstly its best to realise from the outset that the planning process does not effect any of your personal rights at all. I'll come back to that in a bit. The process is essentially a political one, although the council must give consideration to how the proposals fit with both the local plan and supplementary planning guidance. People are often under the impression that the council are bound by the guidance, but they are not...although it tends to be very influential. Ultimately though the system is not there, even as has been suggested here with listed buildings, to pickle things in aspic for all time, but to regulate development in the overall public interest.
1) One ground for objecting to an application is loss of amenity. This includes privacy.
2) As I said, your private rights are not lost by planning permission being granted. So for example you may have rights to light, you may have rights under the Party Wall Etc Act. You may have the benefit of restrictive covenants. You may think the boundary is not where they say and they have no right to build on your land (save for to the extent that the Party Wall Act allows them to project foundations under it) The planning decision changes none of this.
In essence I'd say to look at the guidance. Make objections about any way that the development does not comply with it. Make objections about any loss of amenity, such as privacy. The more objections, especially those that address real planning issues rather than just general gripes, the council get the harder they are likely to look at the matter. In the end don't forget to research what private rights you may have as these may afford you some protection too.
I hope that is helpful
Hard to give definitive advice to you without seeing both the plans and they relate to your property but some useful pointers.
Firstly its best to realise from the outset that the planning process does not effect any of your personal rights at all. I'll come back to that in a bit. The process is essentially a political one, although the council must give consideration to how the proposals fit with both the local plan and supplementary planning guidance. People are often under the impression that the council are bound by the guidance, but they are not...although it tends to be very influential. Ultimately though the system is not there, even as has been suggested here with listed buildings, to pickle things in aspic for all time, but to regulate development in the overall public interest.
1) One ground for objecting to an application is loss of amenity. This includes privacy.
2) As I said, your private rights are not lost by planning permission being granted. So for example you may have rights to light, you may have rights under the Party Wall Etc Act. You may have the benefit of restrictive covenants. You may think the boundary is not where they say and they have no right to build on your land (save for to the extent that the Party Wall Act allows them to project foundations under it) The planning decision changes none of this.
In essence I'd say to look at the guidance. Make objections about any way that the development does not comply with it. Make objections about any loss of amenity, such as privacy. The more objections, especially those that address real planning issues rather than just general gripes, the council get the harder they are likely to look at the matter. In the end don't forget to research what private rights you may have as these may afford you some protection too.
I hope that is helpful
#7
Dazza
-
- Members 3
-
- 4,280 posts
Council Boy
Posted 02 March 2004 - 11:24 PM
Thanks for the advice Steve
Have just sent my worries/concerns to the council for their attention. I have spoken to other residents in the vicinity & they have responded in the same manner hopefully they will turn down this particular application.
Who says this forum is just for winding up people . I have just been contacted by the croydon guardian who are thinking about doing a piece on St Margarets Church because they monitor the forum.
It seems that the game is afoot !
Dazza
Have just sent my worries/concerns to the council for their attention. I have spoken to other residents in the vicinity & they have responded in the same manner hopefully they will turn down this particular application.
Who says this forum is just for winding up people . I have just been contacted by the croydon guardian who are thinking about doing a piece on St Margarets Church because they monitor the forum.
It seems that the game is afoot !
Dazza
Your obviously mistaken me with someone who gives a fig
#8
Rosehip
-
- Members 3
-
- 227 posts
Member
Posted 04 August 2004 - 05:29 PM
Dazza,
What was the outcome on this? Have not heard any news...
Rosehip
What was the outcome on this? Have not heard any news...
Rosehip
#9
Silver
-
- Sponsors
-
- 1,643 posts
Member
Posted 04 August 2004 - 11:44 PM
I was married in St. Margarets in 1974. My school has been knocked down and now the church I was married in. I am beginning to feel like a character in a Steven King novel you know the one where the past dissappears as soon as it has happened! that doesn@t sound quite right. Anyway I sort of feel that churches, like trees should be there forever.
#10
Sylvester
-
- Sponsors
-
- 1,599 posts
Member
Posted 05 August 2004 - 11:30 AM
Agreed, it's a pity to knock down a church - couldn't they convert it into flats like the one on Gipsy Hill? They are very desirable as having "interesting period features", and I even saw one of those flats featured on TV.
aka Pie
#11
Borgus
-
- Members 3
-
- 657 posts
Member
Posted 08 August 2004 - 08:43 PM
Silver,I was married in St. Margarets in 1974. My school has been knocked down and now the church I was married in. I am beginning to feel like a character in a Steven King novel you know the one where the past dissappears as soon as it has happened!
You've really got me worried now!
The hospital building I was born in was demolished and turned into a garden. The church I was christened in has turned into a curry house. My primary school was demolished and houses built there. My junior school was closed and turned into a training centre. My secondary school was closed, renamed and opened, then closed again.
I'd better keep checking in the mirror to see if I'm still here!
Religion: Turning prophets into profits since 4000 B.C.
#12
Dazza
-
- Members 3
-
- 4,280 posts
Council Boy
Posted 09 August 2004 - 09:52 AM
Sorry guys for tardy response been away !
Update it looks like original plans have now been scuppered not official but thats the consensus round here.
However it has been proven that the church is sinking into the clay as several bore holes have been tested so it looks like it will coming down regardless.
My son was one of the last children christened at St Margarets as i was myself & also used to use the hall next door as a cub scout.
Personally I feel the church is a blott on the landscape if you look at it closely its just a box building with very little attractive architecture. The gap between the church & the hall was not planned as a steeple was going to be erected but the project run out of money.
The church only had 20/30 regulers & I feel All saints church services the area much better.
The grounds have now become overgrown & a haven for wildlife butterflies, foxes & wait for it parrots !
Dazza
Will keep posted on any new developments.
Update it looks like original plans have now been scuppered not official but thats the consensus round here.
However it has been proven that the church is sinking into the clay as several bore holes have been tested so it looks like it will coming down regardless.
My son was one of the last children christened at St Margarets as i was myself & also used to use the hall next door as a cub scout.
Personally I feel the church is a blott on the landscape if you look at it closely its just a box building with very little attractive architecture. The gap between the church & the hall was not planned as a steeple was going to be erected but the project run out of money.
The church only had 20/30 regulers & I feel All saints church services the area much better.
The grounds have now become overgrown & a haven for wildlife butterflies, foxes & wait for it parrots !
Dazza
Will keep posted on any new developments.
Your obviously mistaken me with someone who gives a fig
#13
Dazza
-
- Members 3
-
- 4,280 posts
Council Boy
Posted 03 November 2004 - 10:24 AM
all quiet on the western front regards news anyone else have any info regards the church .
Dazza
PS Parrots gone !
Dazza
PS Parrots gone !
Your obviously mistaken me with someone who gives a fig
#14
peanut
-
- Members 3
-
- 332 posts
Member
Posted 04 November 2004 - 09:03 AM
Not sure if you've ever seen this site, quite useful especially to look at boundaries etc
maybe of some use, you'll need to enter full post code
http://planning.lamb..._searchform.asp
maybe of some use, you'll need to enter full post code
http://planning.lamb..._searchform.asp
#15
Dazza
-
- Members 3
-
- 4,280 posts
Council Boy
Posted 02 March 2005 - 09:08 AM
Just to update situation spoke to plannining dept recently who confirmed the plan has now been rejected & no further plan has been submitted unfortunately St Margarets church is derelict & just now being used for a junk drop.
Sad Dazza
Sad Dazza
Your obviously mistaken me with someone who gives a fig
